• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standard

Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

BretJ said:
So you have no problem with me owning an AR or AK? You have no problems with my CCW and carrying where i see fit? If not I will apologize and admit I misread your intent.
Click to expand...

I have no problem. Nor does it bother me f ar or ak is banned. I doubt much will change with current carry laws. But I have neither called for nor advocated any new law at all.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Boo Radley said:
I have no problem. Nor does it bother me f ar or ak is banned. I doubt much will change with current carry laws. But I have neither called for nor advocated any new law at all.
Click to expand...

So you personally would not ban a gun or restrict ccw, but you don't mind if someone else does.....
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

BretJ said:
So you personally would not ban a gun or restrict ccw, but you don't mind if someone else does.....
Click to expand...

Pretty much. It most of it a nonissue.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Boo Radley said:
I don't. I've made no call to ban anything. Does anyone even read what people write?
Click to expand...

Boo Radley said:
I would have trouble banning hunting weapons or some that are used for personal protection.
Click to expand...

Boo Radley said:
Would you say it is the only hunting weapon? Will people be unable to hunt without it? If they can still hunt, I would not be upset. Many tools have duel uses.
Click to expand...

Boo Radley said:
If the reason was rational, sure. You seem to think that if you're allowed to something, no restrictions can be placed on it. I tried to get across to you that you're mistaken. Because I can hunt with a particular weapon doesn't mean it can't be restricted.
Click to expand...

Yeah, youre full of ****. Please exit the thread and pick up your balls on the way out.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

OpportunityCost said:
Yeah, youre full of ****. Please exit the thread and pick up your balls on the way out.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but no. No where do I call for any restriction. I merely answer what would bother me.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Boo Radley said:
Sorry, but no. No where do I call for any restriction. I merely answer what would bother me.
Click to expand...

LOL sure you havent. Why dont you and Haymarket start a 2nd Ammendment fertilizer company.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Does anyone else realize that this thread is obsolete?
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Boo Radley said:
Pretty much. It most of it a nonissue.
Click to expand...

So, now we know "exactly" where you stand even if you do not....took a while to bracket it but we all finally figured it out. You are the guy at a unit that will not make a difficult decision and would rather let someone else do it because then you can stand back and claim, "it wasn't me". I cannot possibly believe you got through a military jump school with that kind of thought process. Civilian jump wings I bet.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

BretJ said:
So, now we know "exactly" where you stand even if you do not....took a while to bracket it but we all finally figured it out. You are the guy at a unit that will not make a difficult decision and would rather let someone else do it because then you can stand back and claim, "it wasn't me". I cannot possibly believe you got through a military jump school with that kind of thought process. Civilian jump wings I bet.
Click to expand...

Hardly. But one has to care one way or the other to take a position. I take quite a few. But what I notice is that many of you when you can't stay within the boundaries of what has actually been said, you attack the person. Such attacks are usually a sign of weakness.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Senator Diane Feinstein, then President of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, was first on the scene to discover the bodies of Supervisor Harvey Milk and Mayor George Moscone who had been shot and killed by Supervisor Dan White (see “Twinkie Defense”).

The trauma of this experience motivated Senator Feinstein to become the nation’s leading gun control proponent. It also motivated her to obtain an unrestricted concealed carry permit from the State of California (rumor has it that she holsters a .357). Senator Chuck Schumer, Feinstein’s comrade, also packs heat.

But, not to worry! Feinstein’s proposed gun control legislation exempts “government officials”. Presumably, her bill would have exempted Dan White, who at the time he shot and killed Milk and Moscone while under the influence of Twinkies, was a government official.

So, if I have this straight, a government official discovered the bodies of two government officials who were shot and killed by a government official motivating the government official to propose legislation to keep guns out of the hands of private citizens while exempting government officials.

Perfect!

“What difference at this point does it make?” – Hillary Clinton
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Diogenes said:
Senator Diane Feinstein, then President of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, was first on the scene to discover the bodies of Supervisor Harvey Milk and Mayor George Moscone who had been shot and killed by Supervisor Dan White (see “Twinkie Defense”).

The trauma of this experience motivated Senator Feinstein to become the nation’s leading gun control proponent. It also motivated her to obtain an unrestricted concealed carry permit from the State of California (rumor has it that she holsters a .357). Senator Chuck Schumer, Feinstein’s comrade, also packs heat.

But, not to worry! Feinstein’s proposed gun control legislation exempts “government officials”. Presumably, her bill would have exempted Dan White, who at the time he shot and killed Milk and Moscone while under the influence of Twinkies, was a government official.

So, if I have this straight, a government official discovered the bodies of two government officials who were shot and killed by a government official motivating the government official to propose legislation to keep guns out of the hands of private citizens while exempting government officials.

Perfect!

“What difference at this point does it make?” – Hillary Clinton
Click to expand...

Government officials and the rich are largely exempt from most laws, it is only those that cannot afford to post bail and retain "real" lawyers that must endure the heavy hand of our "just us" system.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/26/u...sh-for-plea-bargains.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/11/opinion/sunday/go-to-trial-crash-the-justice-system.html
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

BretJ said:
So you personally would not ban a gun or restrict ccw, but you don't mind if someone else does.....
Click to expand...

what is hilarious is how much time he spends on an issue he claims he doesn't care about
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

TurtleDude said:
what is hilarious is how much time he spends on an issue he claims he doesn't care about
Click to expand...

No, time on hat I do care about, silly logic. ;)
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Boo Radley said:
I would have trouble banning hunting weapons or some that are used for personal protection.
Click to expand...

Are you aware that some shotguns appear on the legislation that is currently proposed by Feinstein? As well as, any pistol with a drop clip capacity?
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

j-mac said:
Are you aware that some shotguns appear on the legislation that is currently proposed by Feinstein? As well as, any pistol with a drop clip capacity?
Click to expand...

Do you really take her that seriously? Like I said, this will be settled either b it not passing or the courts. Have some faith in your country.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Boo Radley said:
Hardly. But one has to care one way or the other to take a position. I take quite a few. But what I notice is that many of you when you can't stay within the boundaries of what has actually been said, you attack the person. Such attacks are usually a sign of weakness.
Click to expand...
Hardly a personal attack. It's an observation of your character based on your statements. If you state you would not ban or restrict the rights of others, yet allow others to do so, by default you support the restrictions. The questioning of your badge was an attempt to make you remember what led you to earn it in the first place. We would never tolerate that kind of attitude.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

BretJ said:
Hardly a personal attack. It's an observation of your character based on your statements. If you state you would not ban or restrict the rights of others, yet allow others to do so, by default you support the restrictions. The questioning of your badge was an attempt to make you remember what led you to earn it in the first place. We would never tolerate that kind of attitude.
Click to expand...

No, support requires an active participation. There is none. I also trust our process to largely work. And what led me to earn it was not love of guns, or faulty logic, or lack of faith in our system of governance. I take sides on many issues. Look at health care, or education, or poverty. Real issues. This gun debate is mostly hyperbolic nonsense.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Boo Radley said:
Do you really take her that seriously? Like I said, this will be settled either b it not passing or the courts. Have some faith in your country.
Click to expand...

Faith is a terrible thing to base one's actions on, especially when there is EVIDENCE to the contrary. Your assurances are no reason not to fight such prohibition at every point along the political process. If public opinion, state proposals, and the new law in NY are any indication, such a ban is very possible.

This "it'll never pass" "no one is coming for your guns" tripe gets ever so tiresome when such laws ARE passing and many actually do want gun confiscation.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Lachean said:
Faith is a terrible thing to base one's actions on, especially when there is EVIDENCE to the contrary. Your assurances are no reason not to fight such prohibition at every point along the political process. If public opinion, state proposals, and the new law in NY are any indication, such a ban is very possible.

This "it'll never pass" "no one is coming for your guns" tripe gets ever so tiresome when such laws ARE passing and many actually do want gun confiscation.
Click to expand...

I did not say blind faith, and largely what I see presented as evidence has largely been inaccurate hyperbole.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Boo Radley said:
I did not say blind faith
Click to expand...

Either you have good reasons for what you believe or you don't. I don't place stock in any kind of faith.

Boo Radley said:
and largely what I see presented as evidence has largely been inaccurate hyperbole.
Click to expand...

What is inaccurate hyperbole?

The New York Law? Polling data? Diane Feinstein herself saying she would have gone for an outright firearm ban if she could have? The Daily Kos's blueprint for outright ban? Many states, including my own, requiring registration and will confiscate those who do not comply or have banned guns?

That **** is REAL and is happening or is law. I'm beginning to think you're either being obtuse, or you're just ignorant of whats been going on these past few weeks.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Lachean said:
Either you have good reasons for what you believe or you don't. I don't place stock in any kind of faith.



What is inaccurate hyperbole?

The New York Law? Polling data? Diane Feinstein herself saying she would have gone for an outright firearm ban if she could have? The Daily Kos's blueprint for outright ban? Many states, including my own, requiring registration and will confiscate those who do not comply or have banned guns?

That **** is REAL and is happening or is law.
Click to expand...

A people must have some reasonable belief tat a government is valid, faith if you will, in that government or the government fails. I doubt you would like what might follow.

Even in what you list, there is hyperbole. What one politician says, of the minority party no less, is hardly the event happening. And NY has not banned all guns, and any aw they pass must hold up in court. Remember what appended with the DC effort? Yes, your side is clearly and wildly overreacting.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Boo Radley said:
Do you really take her that seriously? Like I said, this will be settled either b it not passing or the courts. Have some faith in your country.
Click to expand...


Well, firstly, Her bill looks like it will be a non starter for Reid who enjoys a "B" rating from the NRA, and being from Nevada, has a lot of gun owning constituents. Secondly, the point is not whether or not it would pass, or not, nor is it about a court fight which we both know moving the case up the line would/could take a year or better, meanwhile their little un American plan would be implemented, but rather the fact that a hypocrite like Feinstein would bring something like this forward in a bill to begin with. It is unconstitutional, and she violates her oath of office for even attempting it. The hubris, and elitism it takes to be that out of touch is just one example why these people should be tossed out on their ear.
 
Re: Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns | The Weekly Standar

Boo Radley said:
A people must have some reasonable belief tat a government is valid, faith if you will, in that government or the government fails. I doubt you would like what might follow.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't call that faith, if said government gives people a reason to believe its valid.

Boo Radley said:
Even in what you list, there is hyperbole.
Click to expand...

Which?

Boo Radley said:
What one politician says, of the minority party no less, is hardly the event happening.
Click to expand...

That is evidence which refutes the claim that "no one is coming for your guns" when some in fact are trying. The fact they will fail is irrelevant to the point that they in fact exist.

Boo Radley said:
And NY has not banned all guns, and any aw they pass must hold up in court.
Click to expand...

I didn't claim they did. So what is your point? So long as some guns aren't banned we still have a 2nd amendment? To what end? You've got a single shot rifle so you can't complain?

The New York ban is an incremental step down a slippery slope, if you claim otherwise remember those who said the same thing about the 10 round ban not leading to future lower capacity bans.

Boo Radley said:
Remember what appended with the DC effort?
Click to expand...

Yes, I lived under the ban and in DC during the crack epidemic. I know exactly the effect such laws have and increase crime.

Boo Radley said:
Yes, your side is clearly and wildly overreacting.
Click to expand...

Who is my side? Have I overreacted? Is opposing this kind of tripe so that it fails an overreaction? Have you considered what would happen if such proposals went unopposed?

I think you're underreacting, and also "extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!"
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom